Once you go SSD you... go back?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by Constantine1337, Oct 6, 2010.

  1. Constantine1337 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2009
    #1
    Hi,

    I'm seriously thinking of swapping back the SSD and put the 500gig HDD back into my i5 2.53 MacBook Pro. Here are my reasons:

    1. I use the samsung SSD (the same as the Apple Branded one)... The lack of TRIM is basically killing me. My SSD degrades to really low speeds and being a MAC user, I basically have to connect the SSD to a PC, then do a clean wipe to restore its speed. Basically, maintaining a SSD is much harder than an HDD. (and I don't have the cash for OWC/SandForce controller based SSD now)

    2. I need some space. I have 128 GB with Win7 on it. I'm also sick of micro-managing every GB on my SSD in order not to fill it up (and also not writing those cells, thus not having to do Step 1 so often)


    However... I will miss the silence. I love how silent my MacBook Pro is. And the speed is great... Battery life is going to go down...

    Does anyone have any word of advice? Anyone can share his/hers downgrade experience, or maybe did you regret it?



    Thanks,
    Milan
     
  2. jav6454 macrumors P6

    jav6454

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Location:
    1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
    #2
    Hate it... I got the 160GB Intel SSD for my MB, but I played with my brother's HDD driven MB. Least to say, not going to dare touch an mainly HDD driven machine.
     
  3. WardC macrumors 68030

    WardC

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2007
    Location:
    Fort Worth, TX
    #3
    Your SSD should not be degrading like that unless it's like 5 years old and you have been writing at least 10GB to it everyday.
     
  4. rkmac macrumors 6502

    rkmac

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    Location:
    JAFA, New Zealand
    #4
    Check out the OWC data doubler.
    I currently have a 60GB OWC Mercury Extreme Pro SSD with my OS's installed on it, and a 500GB Seagate Momentus XT with everything else on it where my Combo Drive used to be. It really is the best of both worlds. I would also recommend changing your current SSD to a Sandforce one if you can afford it, i've heard too many people say the Apple ones are quite a bit slower.
     
  5. DeusInvictus7 macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2008
    Location:
    Kitchener, Ontario
    #5
    I went from a 160GB Intel X25-M to a Seagate Momentus XT 500GB, only because of the capacity, since I was running out of room. The only thing that is really noticeable, is the vibration/sound from a 7200RPM drive, compared to nothing from the SSD.

    I am actually quite happy with the switch back. Once the XT knows what apps you run most often and such, it feels pretty close to having a SSD. Boot times are a couple seconds longer for me, but I barely ever reboot my Mac.
     
  6. rgarjr macrumors 603

    rgarjr

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2009
    Location:
    Southern Cal
    #6
    If you are hurting for space, get an optical bay caddy and stick your 500GB drive in it.
     
  7. DeusInvictus7 macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2008
    Location:
    Kitchener, Ontario
    #7
    Yeah I thought about doing that, but there are times that I need my optical drive when I'm not home and such. Maybe if things change then I'll do the dual drive setup, but for now, it's not an option.
     
  8. Eddyisgreat macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2007
    #8
    ya.

    Samsung "like apple uses" and the one Apple uses (or toshiba) can be two different things. The one Apple uses should have some level of garbage collection. Not the fastest SSD on the block, but Apple needed an SSD that took this into account.
     
  9. sentros macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2009
    Location:
    Finland
    #9
    I'm sorry to say this but I'm very sceptical about this. The speed degradation comes after a loooong time of re-writes and even a speed degredated SSD will be way faster with a big margin compared to any HDD in the market. I've had my SSD in my Mac for 5 months now and geekbench show little to no speed degredation in that time.

    This should've been a well known limitation of the SSD and should've been considered prior to purchase/installation and there's really no way around this without using additional external storage.
     
  10. uncletoby macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    #10
    TRIM support is a moot issue with Macs as OSX has a superior data management system. It doesn't leave trash around that needs to be picked up.

    I'll never own a computer that doesn't at least boot off a SSD again. My 15" MBP has a 120 gig OWC Mercury Pro SSD, with a 32 gig Windows 7 partition (and the 500 gig that came with the system in the optical bay). It loads cold into OSX in about thirty seconds, reboots into Windows 7 in about 45 seconds. Apps load crazy fast too. Everything just runs beautifully. Worth every penny.
     
  11. milan03 macrumors 6502

    milan03

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    New York City
    #11
    I have that same OWC pro 240GB drive and it cold boots in less than 17sec, or 12sec from chime sound. Sick fast!
     
  12. Eddyisgreat macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2007
    #12
    LoL.

    Please elaborate.
     
  13. tibi08 macrumors 6502a

    tibi08

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2007
    Location:
    Brighton, UK
    #13
    Lol.
     
  14. Constantine1337 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2009
    #14
    Well firstly, my SSD does degrade, but its true, it is still faster than an HDD. I'm actually thinking about buying an OWC SSD, the smaller one and getting a 500GB with optibay in (since I have a MacBook Air Superdrive which I hacked to work with MacBook Pro, I'm covered there). The only problem is, I can't buy OWC SSD in Germany... nobody sells it -.-

    Didn't OCZ bring out OWC comparable SSD just few weeks ago?
     
  15. rkmac macrumors 6502

    rkmac

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    Location:
    JAFA, New Zealand
    #15
    I'm sure they will ship to Germany on the OWC website. They shipped to New Zealand and it took less than 5 days, I was really surprised. And it was still cheaper shipped all the way here than buying a slower SSD of comparable size in New Zealand.
     
  16. tibi08 macrumors 6502a

    tibi08

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2007
    Location:
    Brighton, UK
    #16
    You all should be waiting for the Intel X25-M G3. Looks to be a monster.
     
  17. vant macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2009
    #17
    Wait for the X25-M 3G.

    Buy the 300GB/600GB at a ridiculously low price (compared to today's per GB).

    ???

    PROFIT!
     
  18. milan03 macrumors 6502

    milan03

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    New York City
    #18
    Good luck waiting about 10 months till it comes out.
     
  19. Constantine1337 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2009
    #19
    Intel SSDs should push prices down... but who knows when they'll introduce them. Were there any rumors about the price range?
     
  20. CrackedButter macrumors 68040

    CrackedButter

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2003
    Location:
    51st State of America
    #20
  21. winninganthem macrumors 6502a

    winninganthem

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2008
    #21
  22. dr. shdw macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2008
    #22
    Something about double the capacity for the same amount of money.
     
  23. milan03 macrumors 6502

    milan03

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    New York City
    #23
    In August 2011. I'm sure by then all the other players will have the equivalent SSD available as well.
    That's 10-11 months wait time. Good luck with that.
     
  24. tibi08 macrumors 6502a

    tibi08

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2007
    Location:
    Brighton, UK
    #24
    No patience? The best things come to those who wait..... especially those who already have an X25-M G1 ;)
     
  25. Eddyisgreat macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2007
    #25
    That article has been picked apart by individuals especially if you look at the comments and know a thing or two about SSDs.


    Really? Remind me to stay away from these reviewers in the future. He seemed to know his stuff, too. I'm not really sure how they really thought that the SECURE_ERASE command that should take about thirty seconds on a smallish ssd is the same as a zero write which could take an hour or two.

    I think these these comments say it best:
     

Share This Page